Choice of Court Surfaces in India (South Club to Synthetic?)

[Red_Indian]

It's that argument again - to grass or not to grass.

The only advantage of continuing the grass tradition is in home Davis Cup ties. That too against certain opponents, by everyone's admission. So what's the point of having our youngsters play on a surface which they'll play on less than 4 weeks on the tour (out of which 3 weeks, Queen's and Wimbledon, with due respect, not many will play in). Unless the AITA can bring in a couple of ATP events and host them on grass, attract some top players and try and bring back a tradition of grass on the ATP tour, I don't think it's such a wise move to go back to grass.

I know most of the members here differ from me on this, but I feel our youngsters should grow up playing on clay and hard courts - in atleast 9 out of 10 tournaments. This should be at the juniors/ sub-juniors level, though tournaments like the Futures should be held on Hard courts only in the near future unless we have a bunch of players coming through who are 'clay specialists'.

Clay and hard courts are the "bread and butter" of the modern day tennis professionals - grass, like they say, is for cows

[jaydeep]

Again intelligent discussion about Grass or Clay ...

Anyway before that Nandan Bal commented that Indian side's biggest plus point against China was their fitness level ... He mentioned this squad was one of the fittest in all and team management had all options open for every matches ... In his view Harsh's best weapon is his *Beautuful* returns on service and Prakash's best weapon is his *timing* on the shots ... He also mentioned that mostly they will play next tie against Uzbek at Delhi, then also added another option is Calcutta ... Anywhere else preparing grass courts in 6 weeks time is very difficult job ... And team's preferance is Delhi.

If AITA agree with Indian team management then Red_India u will be again man of our needs ...

Jaydeep.

[jayakris]

Take a look at what Australia does, and that is all I am asking for. Keep the horses readyt o play on ANY surface and occasionally against an opponent that we can handle on hard court or even clay, have the guts to do it. That is all I am asking for.

NO, GRASS IS NOT FOR COWS. GRASS IS ALSO FOR SOME TALENTED PLAYERS OF THE KIND INDIA HAS PRODUCED. The kind that has the reflexes, and aggression and the mental and physical flair to respond to what grass offers. Such players are not there in most countries.

More importantly, and this is my BIGGEST reason to ask for keeping some grasscourts going, most countris do not have coaches who know how to teach the kids to play on grass. Almost all stalwarts and all but a few of the under-35 top coaches in India are pretty damn good in their understanding of the grasscourt game in India.

We still KNOW how to coach the kids for grass. That IS the best reason why we have an advantage on grass.

There is a second (less obvious and obscure-sounding) reason for grass. Due to the lack of systems which coach so-so players into great ones, what has happened in India over the years is that some of the players who came up, did that to a large extent due to instinctive athletic/mental talent, not due to the Lendl-like machine-quality that is coached in modern tennis everywhere, which is not suited for grass. Leander is a prime example. Here is my theory -- there still is a BETTER chance for such players to emerge, due to the much larger genetic pool we have, than in many other countries. If we don't completely kill the natural talent of such players by not providing them at least some minimal chance to use their natural skills (which are most suited for grass) and by providing them no opportunity to be even noticed, we will still come up with a Leander type once in a while. IN the last 4 or 5 years we have not been able to identify any kid with that type of grass court talent, because we have almost entirely stopped any grasscourt events at the junior-level. That is nothing but madness. If you don't buy this second theory, fine, go back to the reason I gave above.

If we start blindly running with the world, we will be so far behind before we know it. If we are smart about our own advantage, identified by some deep careful thinking, we can keep our advantages AND compete with the world. This is why I was asking for years for clay court events. Now, I have to turn around and ask for grass court events, because it is either one extreme or the other for us.

You know what? -- it is easy to take a decision to just drop grass, or to do just clay. It requires a lot of careful planning to nurture it all, and to keep the players prepared for all surfaces, and to keep our natural advanatages with us. Unfortunately, that kind of careful planning is not something we have known for.

Jay

[Red_Indian]

Jay

My point is what will you achieve even if you come up with a bunch of kids that play well on grass - win the Davis Cup if you're lucky enough to host all ties? I don't see any other advantage.

Your point is (to make a silly comparison) to make our players practise eating rice for a food competition, where they'll have to eat pizzas and burgers in record time to win, just because they are genetically better suited to eating rice. The best rice eater may not always be the best (or anywhere near) pizza or burger eater - I can vouch for that

We have to identify players who can play well on hard courts and clay - doesn't matter that we are genetically or otherwise better suited to grass. It's like hockey - the change has been made to astro turf, now you can keep on crying that they (europeans) made the change to suit themselves or you can have youngsters playing on astro turf since a young age so that they learn to beat them at their own game. Similarly, like I said, until the time AITA has enough clout to have a few more tournaments on grass (=will never happen) we need to prepare players for the surfaces they'll play on day-in day-out and that is NOT grass.

To sacrifice players' professional careers for winning the Davis Cup (in a lucky year) is what you're asking, are you not?

[jayakris]

Your point is (to make a silly comparison) to make our players practise eating rice for a food competition, where they'll have to eat pizzas and burgers in record time to win, just because they are genetically better suited to eating rice. The best rice eater may not always be the best (or anywhere near) pizza or burger eater - I can vouch for that

Wrong analogy because the food competition can also be for eating rice, even now, when we have a choice - and many have no idea about rice. More over, we still have no clue how to eat pizza/burger because we have not eaten it long enough. We don't even produce enough lettuce and pepperoni to make burger and pizza (not to mention the wine that goes with pizza!). But we know all about rice and even have unknown steamed malayali dishes that we can zap the world with even now. So we eat rice at least once in a while and not lose the rice ability till at least the time when somebody can prove to be good enough in throwing the pizza dough (coaches) for competing against pizza/burger eaters. Another point is that you seem to say that those who eat pizza/burger would throw up if they eat rice. Not so; the ability to view rice properly and adjust to eating it for a 4-5 weeks a year is very much possible along with all the pizza/burger eating for the rest of the year. Most of the world thinks they will throw up though, and that is a big advantage we have! .. Finally, we still have rice fields and it is still cheaper for us to maintain with labor, while most parts of the world have none left.

R_I --- I am not asking that we turn around and go to grass enmasse. All I am asking is for TWO damn events in the juniors on grass, keeping some 5 locations (we already have about 7 in the north and east - keep at least three of them and add/improve at least one each in western/southern India), having one or two futures or challenger on grass and get the kids to get some grasscourt advice from their coaches for 4-5 weeks a year. They MUST be focussed on hard court for 30+ weeks and clay for 10 or 15 weeks a year. That is all fine. If you read my notes for the last 7-8 years, you will see I was asking for clay for so long and I am not going to back-track on that at all.

Unlike the hocky case, where Europe managed to completely take out grass fields from the game, grass courts are NOT going away in tennis any time soon. Not till the British decide to change that place called Wimbledon into a mud or synthetic court. They are smart enough to know it is not to their advantage to lose the tradition of Wimbledon, because for decades, it is NOT the quality of British tennis that has kept the biggest grand slam in that country. Grass will not go away from the tour. It has shrunk to about the minimum level on the tour and will not shrink much more. ITF will not prevent grass court ties in Davis Cup for at loeast the next 2 decades. You can write it down.

But mixing things up properly, requires planning. Going to extreme and just running madly with teh world is easy.

Jay

[PKBasu]

Nobody is asking for clay and hardcourts to be abandoned altogether in favour of grass. That would, ofcourse, be idiocy.

But we must revive the national grass-court championships (which used to the THE Nationals -- the other one being called the National Hardcourt championship). And we should have a few grass-court junior international events, and at least a few junior grass events. For now, most of our international events should be on hard-courts, with a sprinkling of grass and clay court events. But in the past half year, clay suddenly seems to be dominating -- which is absolute idiocy too. The Satellites (3 out of 4 legs) were on clay, and now we are having 3 Futures on clay. The problem is our clay courts aren't even very good (the Satellite courts were awful by all accounts), so the purpose isn't served in any case.

I think we should seriously consider an annual grass Satellite circuit around the time of the French Open, or perhaps a couple of Challengers on grass around that time (preferably in a cooler place like Bangalore or Pune). Of course, it would have to be just before the onset of the monsoons (which don't really break over north India until the final week of June). Perhaps we could try and get Simla, Nainital, or Mussoorie to build some nice grass courts -- and certainly the ones in the Dooars (north Bengal) would be ideal too, although they would have to host events in late May and early June (because the monsoons hit by mid-June). Well-planned grass events like this could make India an attractive distraction for the anti-clay crowd (Americans especially) who don't want to waste their time on the red clay of Europe. Eventually we could have a second Indian Open every year on grass at the South Club -- perhaps in the same week as the Rome Masters or the first week of FO. Time to think big!

[amr090]

hey pkb i'm from bangalore and my uncle is a member of the bangalore club. their courts are exclusively clay, and they have 1 hard court unfortunately.

[BSharma]

Why can't they spread commonwealth games through out the country. Is there any rule like all the events should be conducted only in one stadium complex? Can't they conduct different games in different cities? I mean are their any restrictions. I don't know, some one please clarify.

It is easier for the organizers to host the Games in one city. International visitors and out of town guests find it easier to stay in one city and see different events at the Games rather than travelling from city to city to watch different events (e.g., hockey, athletics, swimming, gymnastics, tennis, etc.).

There are no rules that all events in the Commonwealth Games or Olympics Games must be held in the same city.

The Winter Olympic Games are often spread over a larger area because the venues are so different and require "mother nature" to become part of the venues. The speed skating and figure skating events are held in a larger town in the mountains but the cross country skiing, biathlon, etc are often held in nearby areas. Some events in the Summer Olympics are also held outside the main city if that city is not a coastal city (sailing events).

World Cup soccer matches are played in many cities, and in fact Japan and Korea co-hosted the World Cup and the matches were held in two countries.

[Rajiv]

i think the importance of grass should not be ingnored and always there should be an emphasis for this surface.
quite a large portion of our victories are due to graas and we should never let go this option when faced with a choice.
and you dnot have to look back for the records , just go back couple of days ago srichapann came a cropper against quereshi simply because of the surface. otherwise on normal playing surface this match would have been a forgone conclusion.

yes only aspect to be debated is why the father and son (the khanna's) get it done only in thier backyard- delhi ,
lack of grass courts around the country cannot be an excuse ,

there are grass courts in assam , in pune in gujrat , in u.p. and many will creep up if you want to make a count ,or in the worst case use cricket grounds , many prewimbledon tourneys were held on cricket grounds and if i am not mistaken at beckhenem in kent still plays matches on the cricket field even in honkong we play grass courts matches near the boundry line at the hong kong cricket club , or for that matter our nationals which had a mandatory rule to hold the tounnament on grass , bombay came up with makeshifts courts

and i am very certain at these centres there would be more spectators comming in watch - true connosiours i would say ,
rather than school kids forcefully herded in

so for future matches the "khanna's" have to look beyond delhi and at other centres or makeshift courts as last option and never forsake the grass option because i feel our best grass court player lp still has the fire , prakash the game(serve & volley) and who knows bofors could be fighting fit again plus guys like sunil , harsh can well rise to the occasion.

[Kamesh Srinivasan]

I think it will be fine if the India vs Uzbekistan tie is played in the US on hard courts! On a more serious note, it is not easy to host a Davis Cup or the Fed Cup. Delhi hosts them most of the time, as many other tournaments, merely for lack of options. Jaipur had fallen out of favour for some time, and Chandigarh centrecourt does not have grass anymore. It is important to play to our strengths in Davis Cup and not try to show the world how good we are on hard courts. To be fair to Leander, he has won on all surfaces against all types of opposition all over the world. He still holds the key to the team's success. Harsh and Prakash are coming up very well. Sunil Kumar and Rohan Bopanna will be pushing for their place soon. It is going to be a healthy scenario. Let us not waste time as to where to hold the events. Does it make any difference to people sitting in the US, Hong Kong or London, whether Davis Cup is held in Kolkata or Kanniyakumari ! Am not trying to hurt anyone's sentiments but trying to put things in perspective, the best I can. I do admit that people abroad care for Indian tennis more than we do !

[jayakris]

Kamesh -- A grass court also CAN BE prepared in South India, or in Goa (hey, Leander might even like that idea!). Or in Mumbai. It is not the world's toughest thing to do. Would somebody even get an ear if a proposal is put forth for that? I doubt it!!

There lies the problem I am complaining about.

Yes, it DOES make a difference to some of us here, who are not happy to hear of nobody showing up in Delhi to watch the matches. My argument is for the FANS in those big cities like Mumbai, Bangalore, Chennai and Hyderabad who would also like to hear an "advantage India" in person for a change.

It is eminently possible to conduct a Davis Cup, on grass itself if needed in many places in India. Need to have the WILL to do it. You know what, it would add some color to the whole scnerio. Get some Hyderabadi "crazies" to come in and add to the atmosphere. Have a few more lungi-clad folks in a place like Kochi. Get a few more kids in some of these places get to go and get hooked on Davis Cup..

Jay

[Red_Indian]

Lee and Mr. Khanna on the "surface" debate.

http://cities.expressindia.com/fullstor ... sid=120437

I think Lee is referring to that ocassional "loopy" bounce that I mentioned every once in a while.

Btw, so that you know, Delhi's RKK stadium doesn't have a "natural" grass court either - it's "constructed" (at huge costs, I was told by AITA officials) each time a tie is to be held. Of course, they have the practise courts ready all the time - at the NSCI club.

Does that add enough fuel to the fire

Edit: BTW Mr. Khanna touches on the subject of holding nationals and Futures on grass in that article, so might wanna check it out on that account as well.

[Red_Indian]

Coming back to the grass, pizzas and burger arguement, the summary of what I was (am) trying to say is that I personally don't think it is such a big deal that we don't hold tournaments on grass anymore. Sure, it would be great if we could plan things and mix tournaments/ surfaces and live happily ever after, but that sort of a thing doesn't happen in this world, defn. not in Indian sports.

I have no objections (infact support) holding a couple of tournaments on grass a year - if I don't see them doing any good, I don't see them doing any harm either. But I'm glad our players are currently "over" exposed to hard courts and clay and "under" exposed to grass, rather than the other way round.

[BSharma]

Thanks Mr. Srinivasan for your comments.

I am sure that Jay and some other members know the stats about India's performance on grass courts at home in Davis Cup.

India has played 20 Davis Cup ties since 1990 at home and has a 17-3 win-loss record! The home wins have been over Netherlands, Croatia, Switzerland, Chile and Great Britain in addition to all the top Asian teams. The three losses were against Sweden (0-5), USA (0-5) and South Africa (2-3).

During this period India played 19 Davis Cup ties away from home and won 8 and lost 11. The only memorable win was against France on clay . All the other victories came against Asian teams and New Zealand. India lost to Netherlands, Australia, USA, Sweden, Great Britain, Italy, Czech, Brazil, Korea and Japan.

How many teams chose to play India on grass? Take a guess. Any number over zero is wrong. All teams play to their strength and and to their opponent's weakness.

Those forum members who are still clamoring for India to play on hard courts against Uzbekistan should look at the record of the two countries and then make an informed decision.

[PKBasu]

It would be utterly fatuous to give up our natural advantage on grass courts for Davis Cup. Therefore it is vitally important that the next generation of tennis players continue to play at least 20% of their tennis during their formative years on grass, so that they retain the innate ability to do well on that surface.
The beauty of Davis Cup is the terrific home-court advantage most teams have. Australia is playing Argentina in the next round, and naturally it is going to be on grass. Australia naturally will be hot favourites.
I understand that Davis Cup (plus 2 weeks at Wimbledon, and a maximum of 3 other weeks plus Newport) is not reason enough to be totally focused on grass the way we were in the old days. But then there is no reason to totally abandon grass either, as we are now doing with tournaments at both the junior and pro level.